Andhra Pradesh High Court
WP/18722/2016 of Potluri Pitcheswara Rao, Vs State of Andhra Pradesh, on 31 December 2021
SRI JUSTICE M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY WRIT PETITION NO.18722 OF 2016 ORDER: This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief: “to declare the inaction of the 2 nd and 3 rd respondents against the representation Dt 19.04.2016 and
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY WRIT PETITION NO.18722 OF 2016
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER:
This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief:
“to declare the inaction of the 2[nd] and 3[rd] respondents against the representation Dt 19.04.2016 and not protecting petitioners right to use the public road formed in Government Poramboku lands in RS.Nos.182,183 and 189 from the grampanchayath Z.P Road to the petitioners fish tank fields in R.S.No 217, 218, 219, 221, 223 of Anamanapudi Village of Nandivada Mandal, Krishna District is illegal, arbitrary and violative of fundamental rights guaranteed by the Constitution of India and principles of natural justice and consequently directing the Respondents 2 and 3 to protect the above stated public road from illegal obstructions of Respondents 5 to 9 and their men by taking action and pass such other orders as this Honble court may deem fit and proper in the interest of justice”
Though the petitioners made several allegations against the respondents, during hearing, learned counsel for the petitioners requested this Court, without touching the merits of the case, to issue a direction to the respondents to dispose of the representation of the petitioners dated 19.04.2016.
Learned Government Pleader for Revenue readily agreed to dispose of the representation of the petitioners dated 19.04.2016, if any pending with the authorities.
In view of the submission of the learned Government Pleader for Revenue, I need not decide the truth or otherwise of the allegations made in the petition. This Court is conscious that no such direction be issued, in view of the judgment of the Apex Court in “The Government of India v. P.Venkatesh[1]”, wherein the Apex Court held that such orders may make for a quick or easy disposal of cases in overburdened adjudicatory institutions. But, they do no service to the cause of justice. As the learned counsel for the petitioners himself requested to issue a direction to dispose of the representation dated 19.04.2016, I find no other alternative except to issue such direction.
In the result, the writ petition is disposed of, directing the respondents to dispose of the representation dated 19.04.2016, in accordance with law, within four (4) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs.
The miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall also stand closed.
_________________________________________ JUSTICE M. SATYANARAYANA MURTHY 31.12.2021 BSP
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY
WRIT PETITION NO.18722 OF 2016
Date:31.12.2021
BSP